C.S. v. Manning

District Court of Appeal of Florida

C.S. v. Manning

713 So. 2d 1026, 1998 Fla. App. LEXIS 5994, 1998 WL 390582

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedMay 28, 1998

DocketNo. 98-1314

StatusPublished

This text of 713 So. 2d 1026 (C.S. v. Manning) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court of Appeal of Florida primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

C.S. v. Manning, 713 So. 2d 1026, 1998 Fla. App. LEXIS 5994, 1998 WL 390582 (Fla. Ct. App. 1998).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

On May 22,1998, C.S., the indigent mother of an allegedly dependent child, filed an application for habeas corpus which asserted that, earlier that day, she had been taken into custody by the trial court on a $2,500 bond merely in order to assure her appearance at a psychologist’s examination four [1027]*1027days later.¹ Within an hour we ordered her immediate release on her own recognizance pending further order.² Upon the state’s subsequent confession that the actual facts were as alleged and that C.S.’s imprisonment was therefore totally unjustified, we now issue the formal writ of habeas corpus. We remind the trial judge of the necessity for the existence of express authority and the exercise of extreme circumspection before the imprisonment of any citizen.

Habeas Corpus granted.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

PER CURIAM.

On May 22,1998, C.S., the indigent mother of an allegedly dependent child, filed an application for habeas corpus which asserted that, earlier that day, she had been taken into custody by the trial court on a $2,500 bond merely in order to assure her appearance at a psychologist’s examination four [1027]*1027days later.¹ Within an hour we ordered her immediate release on her own recognizance pending further order.² Upon the state’s subsequent confession that the actual facts were as alleged and that C.S.’s imprisonment was therefore totally unjustified, we now issue the formal writ of habeas corpus. We remind the trial judge of the necessity for the existence of express authority and the exercise of extreme circumspection before the imprisonment of any citizen.

Habeas Corpus granted.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

713 So. 2d 1026, 1998 Fla. App. LEXIS 5994, 1998 WL 390582, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/cs-v-manning-fladistctapp-1998.